hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [UPDATE] Finishing up 0.96 --> WAS Re: 0.95 and 0.96 remaining issues
Date Mon, 05 Aug 2013 17:01:59 GMT
Clarification would be great. I read Elliot's veto of our work as based on
both process and maturity concerns. Let's see how they stack up.

> HFileV3:
> * Showed up very late in the merge window

Same

> * Still needs revisions

Has not even been reviewed yet. Depends on code only existing in a
developer's private GitHub.

> * Hasn't been put on large clusters publicly.

Same

> * Is not the green field HFileV3, and doesn't have time for a complete
re-do

Not applicable

> * Can easily be done without out downtime

Same

> * Will 100% have perf impacts.

See my other comment about perf impacts if V3 is used without tags.


I have no objection to the trace work on technical grounds.


On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > JIRA says that was created August 3, ie today, is that right?
> >
> >
> Yes.
>
> (Elliott can clarify later when he gets in)  My understanding is that it is
> an update to our bundled htrace jar -- pushing a new release -- and adding
> some trace extra trace spans to expose where time is being spent during
> MTTR.
>
> St.Ack
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message